Main menu

On Reverse Racism

To accost instances of reverse racism–such as when a white person is told that they cannot experience discrimination because of the color of their skin–is consistent with egalitarian principles. But I suspect that these points are sometimes not made in reference to the general idea of egalitarianism, but rather with respect to the ongoing debate about the role of race in America, one which tries to claim that the experiences of all constituent races are on the same playing field. I don’t agree that being white in America is the same thing as being black in America, and as far as this idea is concerned, I don’t recognize the validity of mirror image arguments in this context–where we are not speaking generally of egalitarianism, but rather about the specifics of how the two races undergo two different experiences, part of which is with respect to legality, not generalized principles.

In short, I feel it is sensible to point out that when a white person is lumped together with all white people, that is unfair, but it is not sensible to point out that true equality would be to have a white history month as well as a black one. The former is an instance of egalitarianism, but the latter is a form of ignorance, one that neglects the subjugation the black race has experienced and disregards subsequent attempts to achieve egalitarianism in response to that subjugation. Things are not made equal by all those involved in an unequal system receiving an equal amount of advancement.

Related

Post navigation

1 comment for “On Reverse Racism”

How is “black history month” in this day and age, with the degree of freedom ALL Americans arguably enjoy these days, “egalitarianism”? If white history month is a stupid idea (which it is imo) then so is black history month. They’re both about focusing on and, ultimately, glorifying one race more than others. To be fair, either every race should have a “history month” or none should. That’s just what’s fair.